Reviews by MrBoh:

More User Reviews:

Appearance - This is a light yellow in color with a modest head that went down quickly.

Smell - The light, sweetish grain is a bit gross. It has that putrid moldy corn aroma that a lot of bad American lagers seem to relish.

Taste - The grain comes out just a tad better at the taste but this is still liquid corn.

Mouthfeel - This is light-bodied with some sprightly carbonation that showed a bit more depth then the usual American macros. The finish was crisp and clean with no bitterness IAW the style. Nicely done in this department.

Sinkability - City Brewing makes a few mass-market malt liquors and this one has that flavor but without the booze. If I'm going to drink sub-par beer I at least when to get drunk while doing it.

Very excited to try a new beer from City Brewing, home of classic beers such as Earthquake and Evil Eye.

The beer pours a clear light yellow color with a white head. Looks exactly like a pale lager should. The aroma is as expected, with a lot of grain and corn notes. The flavor is also just like I expected. The beer is fairly sweet and has a lot of grain and corn, along with some grassy notes. Medium mouthfeel and medium carbonation. Not too good, but as far as pale lagers go, you can do worse.

This beer package says brewed in Rochester, NY, this website says it's brewed at City Brewing, and the website says Novato, CA. Either way this is standard pale straw colored lager bright quckly fleeting white head. Speckled lacing down the sides of my mug. Aroma has some biscuit malts, grainy husk notes, a touch of honey and some metallic character to it. Flavor has a sweet slight citrus and fruity tone for a lager, no real hop bitterness this beer is a put your training wheels on craft brew. Some husky grains throwing a bit of offness along with a metallic edge to some apple fruit juice tartness a bit weird. Mouthfeel is light bodied semi fizzy carbonation nothing substantial for me. Drinkability this will be a one time spot I have one of each of the three varieties, I wishI liked them.

From notes. I can't really say what I was expecting...just that I wasn't surprised.

The look is surprisingly...average. A pale yellowish color with a deeper gold hue, this brew develops a small but reasonably sticky white head. It doesn't drop as quickly as I might expect, though it doesn't exactly stick around for the party. It does manage to leave enough spotty lacing for me to decide I really am drinking a beer.
Well...I can't smell or drink this without wondering if it's a macro in disguise, though even some of those are simply brewed lamely for the mass "swigger's" palate but with more skill. This one is too vegetal, with too much of that grainy/fruity thing going on. Cereal grains are strongest, and the only relief comes when at least something by way of some crackery/fruity pale malts and light dusty/floral bitterness manage to find their way out. That said, I suppose it becomes somewhat tolerable once that happens, but it's all that does happen. A bit of sulfur comes through underneath as well.
I expect a light body, and for the style it fits. There's nothing really going on, though. While fairly bland, it's not completely inactive, as there's a nip of crispness on the front and it manages some smoothness.

A: Dark golden color, crystal clear, the head is almost non-existent, but there is quite a bit of lace.
S: Bread and light caramel sweetness.
T: Sweet, lots of light malt/bread character, a hint of toast and crackers on the back of the tongue. No hop character at all, it could use a little more bitterness to balance the malty sweetness. Not quite cloying, but getting there.
M: Round, with a high level of carbonation.
D: Very easy to drink, would be better if it was a little dryer. You could easily give this to a BMC drinker. I would not be disappointed to find this in a cooler at the beach, but I would not actually buy it. It is fine for the style, just not my thing. A perfectly average example of the style. Thanks Chris for leaving a couple in the fridge, the rest will probably be waiting for you to come back.

Pours a pale, clear gold. Head was white to off white and started off quite dense but dropped quickly. Some lacing. Smell had a touch of sweet, light grain but not much else. Sweetbut not syrupytaste on first sip. There was light touch of hops toward the finish. Little, if any aftertaste. The sweetness isnt as pronounced after a few more sips Light seems to be the key adjective for this beer in nearly all ways, including mouthfeel. Low carbonation after letting the initial pour settle. (i.e the first few sips add a bit more sparkle than the rest of the glass. Id actually rate drinkability high because this beer is so light and because it doesnt taste off or bad. Clearly, though this beer is nothing special. Okay, if not great, price ($5.99) and *maybe* a touch above the average BMC if not the overall average beer. Yeah there's better beer out there, but I also give this ber a "good" drinkability becauce it doesn't offend.

Picked up at the local market vaguely remember trying something like this in Ohio.

Clear yellow beer that is a shade or two darker than average with a decent white head that doesn't last.

Smell is a little sweet and a little fruit as if this has been fermented on the hot side. Decent whiff of Nobel hops a little herbal and grassy.

The taste begins a little sweet and fruity and I am again wondering if this was fermented a little hot to speed things up at the factory. Slight flavor of oxidation in the malt, must be the manufacturing because this hasn't been in the store for more than three days. Could use more of a hop presence.

The mouthfeel is OK.

Nothing remarkable about this and it probably the minimal thing that could be considered a craft brew. No real reason to buy.

OK I just had to break down and rate this line ,I have always rested , seeing them sitting in the shelf at Fred Meyer, were I think better beer could be. Appearance, just average lager, maybe slightly more golden than BMC. Nice sized white head. aroma, buiscuity, light graininess, corn. Flavour :sour corn,sweet thin malts, boreing. Thin and dead on the palate. Overall not great, why buy this when you can get BMC for cheaper?

Pours a light apple juice color with lots of carbonation and a finger of white head pushing up off the top of the liquid. The head doesn't last long at all though, and there's only a minimal amount of lacing.

The aroma is prevalent, but not too complex. Some slight floral aroma, but mostly a cheap, kind of boozy graininess.

The taste is also unimpressive. A light sweetness up front chased away by a slightly musty grain flavor. Not much hoppiness at the end, either, but you can tell there's something there.

The mouthfeel is pretty decent for a lager, just not much to back it up. Medium bodied with a moderate amount of carbonation for a crisp feel.

This is a pretty standard beer that needs a lot of improvement. I could maybe drink two at the most, but I would certainly search for something with more character to it.

This is my second Tap Room No. 21 (from World Beers of Navato, CA.) This time it's a lager, and that's all they call it -- Tap Room No. 21 Lager. I was hesitant, because something that only identifies itself as an American lager could be anything from Bud Light to SA Black Lager. But I was feeling adventurous, so here I am, sipping this brew. It’s not bad, closer to a Sammy than a Bud, at least.

Poured cold (40F) from a bottle into a pilsner glass.

A – A little (1/2 inch) off-white head, with low persistence and almost no lacing. The color is great though – a golden amber with excellent clarity. The color makes this a pale lager, although the flavor tells me it’s more of an amber lager. It’s a toss-up, to me, but I’ll go with pale.

S – There wasn’t much nose here, and I was a little disappointed. There was a nice malty aroma, leaningtoward the caramel/amber malts, but not nearly as much as I would have liked.

T – Generally balanced, but a little malty sweetness. The flavor runs heavily toward amber and caramel malt, with a very noble hop bite, slightly floral, and a little spicy – just a hint of clove, and possibly cinnamon. There is a lot of complexity in the flavor of this beer, but I poured it too cold. You won’t appreciate it all until it gets up to 50F +. There is a lot of aftertaste, both of the hops and the amber malt. It’s not unpleasant though. A strange metallic taste comes through on the palate after a while. Not sure if I like that so much.

M – The mouthfeel is light to medium, but with a LOT of carbonation. I’ll make sure my next one is warmer, with plenty of time to form a good head and maybe get rid of some of that excess carbonation. That may affect my impression.

D – The overall drinkability of this beer is very high. It’s a good lawnmower beer, or a decent session beer, especially for your less zymaturologically attuned friends. The sweetness, spiciness, and carbonation combined to give me a first impression not unlike ginger ale. It improved as it went along, and I suspect that it will be better if I open the next one warmer, then allow it to rest in the glass a bit before tasting. I reserve final judgment until after I’ve experimented with the rest of this six-pack.

A: Nice looking lager, clear golden color. Very little head with no lacing.... Lots of bubble from lots of carbonation.

S: I'm getting a steeliness and maybe apple with a little breadiness... nothing to crazy.

T: Very lager like... there is a little steeliness, with a bready yeast flavor with a little pepper in the aftertaste... but it fades quickly. Nothing to crazy... pretty ordinary.

M: Pretty smooth, light to mid bodied. The carbonation not as high as I would have thought.

D: Got this brew on the cheap.... so not bad for cheap beer.... It reminds me a little of Bud, just a little more flavor.... I would not run out looking for this one, but if offered I would not turn it down..